It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If it was Israelis (not Saudis & 1 Egyptian) behind 9/11, would USA have bombed them?

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:11 PM
link   
With US handing out loads of money to Israel with seemingly no end in sight, wonder what would happen if evidence eventually comes to light showing Israel behind that sad massacre now over a decade ago.. would US bother to address it, or just let it go(what would that then mean?) Well, apparently there's all the proof in the world available to CSI but that isn't the topic at hand:

I'm asking: WOULD IT MATTER ANYWAYS??

And the evidence suggests, no way, since USA bombed Afghanistan & Iraq -and then other countries - but NOT Saudi Arabia and NOT Egypt.. now doesn't that say it all?


Video from about year ago, Obama gave Israel $70billion more in one shot and apparently in live coverage even himself thought it was only 70 million not 70 billion *facepalm* of course thats already old news; who know how much israel has been awarded since them for its ongoing campaigns =/





posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Umm, the US did not bomb the Saudis or Egypt. so much for that argument. If the bombers had been from the UK, would the US have bombed them? is as appropriate and relevant a question. Last time a government sanctioned attacking the US, they got bombed. Japan and Germany are good examples. that Al Queda was not directly a nation-state certainly provided difficulties in responding, but it did not prevent a response.

the US did what it said it was going to do the first day out. The US went after what the US perceived to be the perpetrators of the crime, namely Al Queda, primarily because they said they did it and the evidence supported their comntention. And as a result Al Queda as a STRATEGIC force harmful to the US was all but eliminated. that doesn't mean they can't send out developmentally disabled people, children, and zealots as suicide bombers to blow up busses full of school children, but they have been unable to inflict major damage on US soil for over a decade, fortunately.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Thats the point, though. US claimed Saudis & 1 Egyptian were TRAINED in Afghanistan and even suggested Iraq even though Saddam was so against Al-CIAda, no way he would be a CIA ally like Israel.

My point is the Israeli bomb trucks are evidenced... yet US took its agenda woops I mean retaliation again Iraq, Afghanistan (and later, Libya, Pakistan, Syria..)

As for Saudi & Egyptian relations, clearly they have soured post 9/11!

So, what about holding Israel accountable for anything? UNLESS...



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:58 PM
link   
Well we know that Israel attacked the USS Liberty and did nothing about it. Granted wasn't to the scale of 9/11 but what level is unacceptable?

www.uss-liberty.com...



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 


Give us something a bit more tangible to work with here.

You seem to be flailing about the 9/11 forum flinging *stuff against the wall in the hopes that something sticks.

edit on 10-2-2014 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Considering US is handing Israel 70 billion in one shot and thats not the only amount, apparently Israel is REWARDED for everytime it unleashes its violence!

Wonder how much will US give Israel when Israel uses one (or two) of its NUKES? A $1 Trillion?!



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   
If it was the Israelis behind 9/11, do you think that the Patriot Act would still have been signed 45 days later and do you think Afghanistan would still have been invaded 26 days later?

In my opinion, the people who orchestrated this event don't align themselves with any particular country - they are global.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 09:28 PM
link   
Bottom line? My guess is NO!

Different reasons though. If we had bombed the Saudis-especially when it is only a segment of the Saudis involved with the remainder fairly pro-west-we have wiped out the major oil supply for a good portion of Europe. That would have probably caused a world-wide economic collapse.

Israel is a nuclear power with estimated 100-200 weapons. They are fully capable of using them against the U.S. in the same manner the Islamic Extremists would, suit-cases, containers, so on. On top of that threat, in all likelihood Israel would take out every major middle city with those nukes.

Flat out too risky. Same decision as Saudi Arabia...nope.



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 09:39 PM
link   

schuyler
Umm, the US did not bomb the Saudis or Egypt. so much for that argument. If the bombers had been from the UK, would the US have bombed them? is as appropriate and relevant a question. Last time a government sanctioned attacking the US, they got bombed. Japan and Germany are good examples. that Al Queda was not directly a nation-state certainly provided difficulties in responding, but it did not prevent a response.

the US did what it said it was going to do the first day out. The US went after what the US perceived to be the perpetrators of the crime, namely Al Queda, primarily because they said they did it and the evidence supported their comntention. And as a result Al Queda as a STRATEGIC force harmful to the US was all but eliminated. that doesn't mean they can't send out developmentally disabled people, children, and zealots as suicide bombers to blow up busses full of school children, but they have been unable to inflict major damage on US soil for over a decade, fortunately.


The US govt blatanly ignored all the evidence in the investigation of 9/11, cooked up a bogus scenario and used that deception to throw away our Constitution and wage a hypocrytical war on a bunch of small-time desert dwellers.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia are in Israel's back pocket. Look at the formation of modern Arab world in the early 1900's. It was all British and American money distributed by political Zionists that molded and exploited these developing Arab nations. Thanks to the League of Nations (now the United Nations), now these Zionist psychopaths have Headquaters it the Holy Land.

Nothing against the Jews, but Zionism is poison and contradicts the Torah. The Jews are better off without the Zionists.

And another thing that gets me. The UN has been sticking its nose where it doesnt belong since day one. So-called US patriots and conservatives despise the UN as I do too, so why the HELL do we insist on sending all our money to a nation that was literally spoken into existace by the UN (aka Legue of Nations).



posted on Feb, 10 2014 @ 09:50 PM
link   
Here is what I have always believed: there were certain moves made that must have come from the top of the US political power structure on 9/11. That suggests to me that whoever was behind it, people in the US government knew beforehand. And if that is the case, they were likely in on it. And if they were not, they obviously helped in some fashion, which means they got something out of the deal.

I highly, highly doubt that if Israel was behind the attacks, which is not that far-fetched in today's world, they would have just done it without anyone in the US government knowing about it. So I don't think they acted on their own, because as I said, there were certain things that happened, such as the non-action of the military, the stand-down orders, and a plethora of other "coincidences" that suggest US government involvement at a high level. And considering the military involvement, due to the chain of command, one would assume that either the help came from within the military itself, or came from someone in the political sector who had control over individuals within the military. The commander in chief, aka the president of the US, comes to mind.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 06:26 AM
link   


If it was Israelis (not Saudis & 1 Egyptian) behind 9/11, would USA have bombed them?


OP, your title, this is something that really does my head in when it comes to 9/11 "truthers", you claim that there is a hidden secret truth behind 9/11 which to me would imply that you have a deep understanding of the subject, so deep that you have been able to spot this secret hidden truth or at least able to speculate as to what it might be. After all you cannot say the offical story is totally rubbish with out at least having a solid grasp of it.... right???

Because you obviously dont have a clue, your title states 18 Saudi's and 1 Egyptian, this is WRONG, there were 15 Saudi's 2 from the UAE, one from Lebanon and finally one from Egypt.

So you have demonstrated in this thread so far that you dont even know even the most basic details about the 19 hijackers yet you start a thread speculating as to what it would be like if it was Israeli hijackers.

I never even bothered reading beyond your title if you cant get the basics correct then you dont stand much change of getting anything else right.

Basically OP, you just should not have bothered with this thread, if you dont know what your talking about dont open your mouth, as Mark Twain once said:

It is better to keep your mouth closed and let people think you are a fool than to open it and remove all doubt



Forgive me, but i find it infuriating when people on this site start up a thread with out even the most basic fact checking and then proceed to debate like they know what they are talking about. How can anyone take you seriously on this thread when you couldn't even get the most basic facts correct.

edit on 11-2-2014 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


Very well spoken. It is indeed a waste of time to even read the post much less respond. We both know that persons who have put a great deal of time into their positions, that they want a critique, would never make such boisterous incoherent claims.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
 


You're setting up a red herring. The fact is that one of the alleged terrorist was an Egyptian, and most were Saudi. The topic was about Israel's involvement. Clearely Mossad had foreknowledge of the 9/11 events, so that puts blood on Israel's hands by the law of the Torah. If someone has foreknowledge of an impending mass murder and does nothing but watch, then he is guilty too.

Im calling red herring.



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 05:57 PM
link   

OtherSideOfTheCoin


Because you obviously dont have a clue, your title states 18 Saudi's and 1 Egyptian, this is WRONG, there were 15 Saudi's 2 from the UAE, one from Lebanon and finally one from Egypt.

So you have demonstrated in this thread so far that you dont even know even the most basic details about the 19 hijackers yet you start a thread speculating as to what it would be like if it was Israeli hijackers.



Yea lets pretend I could have fit all that extra (2 Emeriti and 1 Lebanese) in the title.

Lets pretend that 15 out of 19 Saudis is not of chief of imprortance, nor is the name Mohammed Atta (which is why i chose to list Saudis + Atta's nationality)



posted on Feb, 11 2014 @ 06:02 PM
link   
15 Saudi's done 9/11....Bush and co let Bin ladens (Saudi) family flee the country.....Land of the free right enough. what a shambles.
edit on 11-2-2014 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 04:08 PM
link   
If it would have been Israelis people would have raised more questions, but Saudi Arabia attacking the US makes as much sense as Israel attacking the US. Saudi Arabia has been in the pockets of Nato through England far longer than Israel.

Also the official version was not that any given country attacked America, but Alquaeda attacked America and to get Bin Laden the US had to go into Afghanistan.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 04:15 PM
link   

gardener
With US handing out loads of money to Israel with seemingly no end in sight, wonder what would happen if evidence eventually comes to light showing Israel behind that sad massacre now over a decade ago.. would US bother to address it, or just let it go(what would that then mean?) Well, apparently there's all the proof in the world available to CSI but that isn't the topic at hand:

I'm asking: WOULD IT MATTER ANYWAYS??

And the evidence suggests, no way, since USA bombed Afghanistan & Iraq -and then other countries - but NOT Saudi Arabia and NOT Egypt.. now doesn't that say it all?


Video from about year ago, Obama gave Israel $70billion more in one shot and apparently in live coverage even himself thought it was only 70 million not 70 billion *facepalm* of course thats already old news; who know how much israel has been awarded since them for its ongoing campaigns =/




Isreal would never ever do such a heinous act as it is freedom loving democratic,civiluzed free country.

The mere thought of such a thing is anathema to any isreali.

you should not even suggest such a thing.

it is not part of their culture suicide bombings.

they don't expect 72 virgins heaven nonsense.

They are a caring people.they have suffered greatly under hitler.they know suffering.they don't want to make other people suffer.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 04:17 PM
link   

tinner07
Well we know that Israel attacked the USS Liberty and did nothing about it. Granted wasn't to the scale of 9/11 but what level is unacceptable?

www.uss-liberty.com...


Didn't the US come close to a major bombing of Egypt over that one before the dust cleared.



posted on Feb, 16 2014 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by gardener
 


Does it really justify attacking Afghanistan just because these saudi Arabian terrorists trained in Afghanistan?

No it doesn't.

Does it justify attacking Iraq because these Saudi Arab terrorists trained in Afghanistan?

No it doesn't.


Nothing the US did after 911 is justified by their actions. The US attacked purely based on geopolitical strategies that were in Americas best interests.



posted on Feb, 17 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

spy66
reply to post by gardener
 


Does it really justify attacking Afghanistan just because these saudi Arabian terrorists trained in Afghanistan?

No it doesn't.


It does, if they were still there, and training. As they were.


Nothing the US did after 911 is justified by their actions. The US attacked purely based on geopolitical strategies that were in Americas best interests.


Afghanistan? Geopolitically significant? Not in the slightest.

Iraq is a different story, and yes 9/11 was the transparent excuse and the build-up to Iraq prevented the US from finishing correctly in Afghanistan in 2002.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join